Expected Transactions Before The Draft

[MoLewisrocks]

How many layers of glasses did you need to view Omare Lowe and Hank Poteat and better than Asante Samuel and Ellis Hobbs.

Comparing projected starters to emergency backups to what end?

As far as proving you can stay on the field, I don't know what that means? Gay got a high ankle sprain. So that means he can't play? Lots of teams get high ankle sprains. Lots of players get put on IR.

Getting injured is not the same as fragile or injury prone.

That depends...and we have no real knowledge of what Gay (or most anyone else) had as far as injuries go.

I look at the secondaries we had to use in the past and wonder how they got the job done.

Two things - "had to use" as in just because you get away with something doesn't make it right. Which jives with BB's saying that it you aren't getting better you are getting worse.

But this is just a misdirection argument over Ty Law. Some think we need him, some think we don't.

As a veteran minimum player, or even $1.5 mil or so, fine, bring him on board. But any big $$$ over a mil or a mil and a half is not worth it.

If BB signs him, fine. Good. I hope not, though.

I don't think Ty Law is worth all the discussion, personally, becasue he will go to the team that offers the most money. I do hope that isn't the Patriots.

Ty is going to get a lot more than veteran minimum. He's worth at least what we paid Starks and Poole last season ($2.5-3.5M). It's fine to rag on Ty because of that I me personality where his contracts are concerned, I do it all the time. But he's still a pretty good NFL starting corner and they make some serious money. Last year with the injury uncertainty he couldn't get anywhere near what he wanted up front or long term, just like Warfield couldn't this season because he's one mis-step away from year long suspension. Ty is now two years removed from injury coming off a difficult season he made the most of when the team he played for was in shambles. Maybe I missed it but we didn't send any DB's to the pro bowl undeservedly or otherwise.

Hobbs has a lot of potential, so does Asante if he can perform consistently, and Gay is still intriguing but a year long injury removed from showing flashes on a Superbowl D. Warfield may flourish here or he may not adapt as well as hoped even while maintaining sobriety. With Law over a year past the injury and just a year removed from performing well in the system BB and the team knows what to expect from Ty. It would certainly all come down to value, which is always problematic where Ty is concerned, but this is still a player only 2 years removed from a $10M cap hit and an $8M salary that BB chose to absorb in 2004.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

MoLewisrocks,

I think some of us consider Law a top corner if healthy, others an uneeded $1.5M a year backup. I believe that bb making a starting offer of $6.5M a year puts him on the side of considering Ty Law closer to the probowl than retirement.

Some think that Samuel, Hobbs and Gay are a weak set of corners. Some think they are great. After all, we won a Super Bowl with less. By that logic, we should start Troy Brown at nickel. Maybe the front seven are so good that the defense will be a top defense, even with weak corners. I suppose. Willie will be replaced by a draftee who will walk right in and be as good????? The front seven is NOT as good. We need to improve wherever we can.

IMHO, corner is certainly a spot that could use improvement. I know others think that Ty law isn't a major imporvement. There simply isn't enough koolaid in MA to get me to believe that; but thankfully bb isn't saying that, or acting that way. Make no mistake, a jag like Chad Scott or Warfield could be starting in Game One. They will certainly be given every opportunity to compete for the spots, or they could be unemployed. There will not be a lot of other takers. Poteat will also be competing for a roster spot. Take off your glasses! If Samuel, Gay and Hobbs are our secondary, Troy will see action this year.

mg - not sure if you understand the tint of my glasses...I lean more toward what you are saying - I just think you overestimated Ty's market value given his age and the injury. Just as space and pats1 are vastly underestimating his market and remaining value as a starting corner who could yet transition to a pro bowl safety and overestimating the potential upside of our present roster of CB's.

 

[pats1]

mg - not sure if you understand the tint of my glasses...I lean more toward what you are saying - I just think you overestimated Ty's market value given his age and the injury. Just as space and pats1 are vastly underestimating his market and remaining value as a starting corner who could yet transition to a pro bowl safety and overestimating the potential upside of our present roster of CB's.

Beat me to it.

What is really boils down to is my optimism vs. your pessimism towards the current roster corners, as well as my pessimism vs. your optimism towards Law's value.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

But that is cheaper, more neglected talent than Law. It is certainly a BB strategy, but more as a scheme to get a team up the ladder. Now that all the traces of pre-Beioli are gone, and the team is now sitting at or near the top of the mountain, that strategy becomes less effective as the expenses of winning ammount.

It's not a question if they can afford Law (they can). It's the use of the money. He'd be just another body in training camp, fighting to unseat some of the guys who have moved up the ranks and developed since his depature.

There is another saying pats1 - the only thing harder than getting to the top is staying at the top. BB knows this. And he knows not all the talented prospects on his team will decelop to provide sufficient value over the long haul not to be always on the lookout for a bankable alternative. That's what Ty may well represent to BB right about now. And Ty isn't going to break anyone's bank at 32, let alone ours. He's not going to get top corner money, nor is he going to play for a veteran minimum deal this year. He didn't last season - he signed for basically $2.5M and ended up making $6.5M. Of course that was a one year occurrance. He won't get that long term, and long term at 32 will likely be a 3 year deal at best. BB will likely end up banking some of this years cap space simply because there aren't many more places he can spend it wisely. Too soon for many more extensions other than Branch - those players have yet to prove their future market value because of inconsistency.

Do you in fact not trust BB to play the best player at the position regardless of contract? I do. As I said, Ty can't block the others if they out perform him. And BB won't even attempt to sign him if he thinks he couldn't.

 

[skri65]

I for one hope we DON'T sign a shut down corner. I think we are set with the ones we have now and I think paying significant money for a shut down corner would prove to be a waste of money. Like someone else said, Asante, Gay, and Troy limited peyton to 3 points. Why should we waste money on a shutdown corner?

BB will not sign a shut down corner. You may quote me on this, he will NOT sign/(trade for) a shutdown corner. He's too smart.

 

[Brarrell]

While the literal shutdown corner may be a thing of the past, most of us don't view the 32 year old Ty Law as a shutdown corner anyway - just a better veteran corner than anyone we currently have on the roster. And saying we are in better shape in the secondary at this minute than we have been in the past 3 years is wearing multiple layers of rose colored glasses, which pats1 has been known to sport form time to time. Gay needs to prove he can stay on the field (that's a BB talent value rule) and his play as a rookie in a backfield commanded by 37 wasn't just a tease. Samuel has to prove he can be the Asante of 2004 or post season 2005 consistently, and not the Asante of most of 2005. Particularly since he is also a FA after this season. Hobbs certainly has talent and potential but hasn't yet played a full season. Warfield may be better than a Poole or Starks in 2004 and 2005, which wouldn't be a stretch if he's breathing, but he's certainly not Ty Law or Ty Poole circa 2003-early 2004. And he too has to prove he can stay on the field for other than injury reasons. Sanders missed most of last season so while he has potential there's no quarantee he fully reaches it let alone as a sophomore.

Wilson was being touted as a potential pro bowls FS playing along side Rodney. Wilson dealing with adversity was a whole other matter.

Most of us aren't viewing Law as a sentimantal signing. And sentimentality aside, even Troy turned out to be a very real necessity in a reportedly loaded WR corps and backfield last spring, as may yet be the case again this season. Appreciating past performance and familiarity with the system should not be confused with mere sentiment. Same could be said to those who cringe at the thought that Flutie may be back precisely because he is an affordable veteran presence who knows the system, and that is what #3 QB generally should be.

We had lots and lots of this team is loaded sentiment heading into 2005. How'd that work out? People need to stop making desire to improve some bizarre failure on an imaginary loyalty litmus test.

What makes corners look great a Dline that gets pressure. Thats when the Pats defense turned the corner last year. Draft another quality corner with a day one pick but the day of the shut down corner means what? With 4 and 5 reciever sets who covers the other 4 guys thats why Dline is the most important part of your defense and somebody anbody should tell that knuckle head Mike Felger that.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I don't know whether the day of the shutdown corner is over. It'll take some years to know. I remember how you couldn't build a dynasty in the cap era....

But I tend to agree. Given that, I'd love to see a good corner, great hitter. I'm just stupid like that, but I do believe that a bunch of nasty assassins - to include corners - gets into a receiver's head. Like... "oh crap, these guys again?"

Cover corner, yeah. Suffer corner, hell yeah.

PFnV

 

[jct]

Ty was there for all 3 of our SBs.
Got 10 INTs last year.
We had early exit.
Oh ya we tried to replace him with a patchwork of crap...
Starks,Scott...etc

 

[pats1]

Well, he wasn't exactly there for the third one.

 

[RayClay]

Well, he wasn't exactly there for the third one.

He exactly wasn't there at all.

 

[patsfan13]

I am in 'the kids are alright' column. Whne I look back at last season I don't put the problems in the first half of the year on the CB's.

We started out with TJ retired and TB rehabbing from his stroke. Beisel and Brown were in over their heads, IMO this caused us to play a very vanilla D. To compound thd D's problems, the secondary was decimated by injuries (IIRC 7 of our 11 DB coming out of TC were injuried). Oh yeah, Seymour was injured, and Wilfolk was playing too close to the LOS and was ineffictive.

The D stunk, we kept trying guys at Rodney's spot and it wasn't working.

Then TB came back Sey came back, Vrabel moved inside, Wilfold dropped a yard off the LOS, Hawkins rook over at S (doing a very good job IMO), and the D was outstanding the second half of the year. The only porblem I saw at CB was the departed Duane Starks.

Hobbs and Samuel were contributors to the D's success the second half of the year. they were part of the solution NOT part of the problem. R Gay was on IR, IMO he will be a contributor this year, he had a good rookie year, and I see no reason he won't return and be better than he was that year.

We need a couple of LB's and a backup NT before we need any DB's.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Expected transactions before the draft:

(and like I have said - enough with this whole "shut-down" corner thing already! That era is OVER! The Patriots are in better shape in the secondary this minute than they have been in the past 3 years. The Pats offense centers around the front 7. They're not going big bucks on any "shut-down" corner when they have been developing three very fine and cost-effective corners (Gay, Samuel, Hobbs) who will perform admirably. Let's not forget about Geno or my man James Sanders, either. Too many jump at the prospect for having Law or others returning simply because of that sentimental attachment. Bugs the hell out of me.)

Ty Law is the COVER ME COVER CORNER. Belichick knows Law will be around until after the draft. So talk to him to lead everyone to believe it's LB or WR that you want...sign Law and be a LB pig in the draft...NO-WAY---JON JOSEPH IS WHAT BELICHICK COVETS...he will settle for Cromartie, Marshall or even Jennings.

Hard to believe a Patriots fan could be this Naive??? I have several posts in the draft forum explaining the shut down corner needs of the team. Belichick's defense operates great under normal circumsrtances and it operates exceptional with a shut down corner.

One of the biggest reasons the Patriots won the 2001 Super Bowl was due to the threat of the blitz. Belichick/Crennel showed blitz constantly throughout the entire game and yet often dropped back into coverage...totally confusing the Rams.

Now let's go back to last years loss to Denver...how often did we show blitz??? Not often because there was no way to show it and get away with it. Belichick's defense is predicated upon showing much and delivering differently. We couldn't even stop them on their final drive because we had little left to disguise...we couldn't safely show blitz and "Denver knew it.

That won't happen this year...there are 3 shut down ability CB's in the draft. Huff and williams will go early. Hill and Youboty are slot corners. That leaves Joseph, Cromartie(??? needs work), Marshall & Jennings.

All are 2nd round, need some work material but at least 2 could go in the 1st round because they all are great athletes with @4.4 speed.

Belichick's biggest gamble on draft day IMO. He could get shut out by #52.... only Joseph is worth rd-1 money...but 1 of those 4 is coming to New England...bet on it.​

The key to this whole draft is who Belichick thinks he can grab in round 3 with value that will allow him to go
SHUT-DOWN CB IN 1 OR 2.
:singing:​

 

[CrazyDave]

He exactly wasn't there at all.

Here he is 2 weeks earlier. Not shutting down notihn'.

 

[pats1]

We need a couple of LB's and a backup NT before we need any DB's.

Right!

SHUT-DOWN CB IN 1 OR 2.

Wrong!

You're correct in saying the Belichick defense is predicated on showing the blitz look. That's what the 3-4 is all about. It's those 4 linebackers who'll be bouncing all around, usually with none or one blitzing. But with the 4-3, the rush must come almost solely from the defensive line, requiring a shutdown corner to buy that time and "take away half of the field" for a certain amount of time - if that's even possible anymore with Polian. In the 3-4, the corners depend on a great rush. In the 4-3, the rush depends on great corners.

 

[skri65]

I tend to agree F.B.N. that we could certaintly be BETTER with a shutdown corner. Quite frankly, that's common sense. The question is whether we need one more than we need a LB or WR. And the answer is no, we don't.

Teams tend to get better when better players are playing. But they can still be pretty damn good without them. And this compromise is somethign I believe BB will make in order to fill the other holes we have.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a shutdown corner on the team but there is a cap to keep in mind. I'd also love a million dollars, a nice car, a hot girlfriend..

 

[pats1]

I tend to agree F.B.N. that we could certaintly be BETTER with a shutdown corner. Quite frankly, that's common sense. The question is whether we need one more than we need a LB or WR. And the answer is no, we don't.

Teams tend to get better when better players are playing. But they can still be pretty damn good without them. And this compromise is somethign I believe BB will make in order to fill the other holes we have.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a shutdown corner on the team but there is a cap to keep in mind. I'd also love a million dollars, a nice car, a hot girlfriend..

Exactly.

3-4 corners will benefit from the offense not knowing what to expect from the linebackers - sometimes switching into conservative mode, where they'll reap some of the rewards. But as skri just said, a shutdown corner would be nice in this situation but not a necessity.

A 4-3 scheme will benefit more from the shutdown corner. If a QB's top receiver is taken down, then a Mathis/Freeney or Usi/Strahan combo can go to town on that QB. (Although the Colts will emply the Cover-2, where the cloud of lightning fast LBs and DBs will moreso provide the time. Let's not forget Simeon Rice has Ronde Barber, and the Browns...err...Broncos DL has Champ)

 

[Ring 6]

A 'shutdown' corner is no good if:

1) The corner on the other side is getting burned all day.
2) The run defense sucks
3) You cannot get a pass rush and the shut down has to cover too long to shut anyone down
4) You cant score points and the other team can be patient
5) You are playing from behind

BB isnt about shut down corners, or blitzers, or looks or schemes,
He is about TEAM DEFENSE.
Job 1 is to put 11 players on the field who can adequately do their job.
AFTER that, its a wonderful thing to have special players who can do their job very well, but its a luxury. Which position those guys play is almost irrelevant if you have the 11 who can play well together to start with.

 

[mgteich]

We are indeed close on analysis. It is just a matter of what a top corner is worth. You may be closer. I am not reacted to you as much as to others who think Law is not worth what we paid Starks last year.

mg - not sure if you understand the tint of my glasses...I lean more toward what you are saying - I just think you overestimated Ty's market value given his age and the injury. Just as space and pats1 are vastly underestimating his market and remaining value as a starting corner who could yet transition to a pro bowl safety and overestimating the potential upside of our present roster of CB's.

 

[pats1]

We are indeed close on analysis. It is just a matter of what a top corner is worth. You may be closer. I am not reacted to you as much as to others who think Law is not worth what we paid Starks last year.

Remember that was through a trade, not a signing.

 

[mgteich]

1. We can improve a lot by adding a top corner (Law or in the draft)

2. We can improve a lot by adding a couple of quality linebackers (we've about run out in free agency, so this is a must draft need)

3. If we choose Law now, we will better be able to better focus on LB in the draft.

It a matter of whether we need a CB or a LB more. We definitely need a linebacker more. The question is whether the signing of Law will help this team.